Organizer 1: Eduardo Barasal Morales, NIC.br
Organizer 2: Tiago Jun Nakamura Nakamura, NIC.br
Organizer 3: Antonio Marcos Moreiras, Brazilian Network Information Center - NIC.br
Organizer 4: Mukom Akong Tamon, AFRINIC Ltd
Organizer 5: Hartmut Glaser, Brazilian Internet Steering Committee (CGI.br)
Organizer 6: Nathalia Patrício, NIC.br
Organizer 7: ￼Adarsh Umesh, ISOC Rural Development SIG
Organizer 8: Andrea Erina Komo, USP
Speaker 1: Marco Hogewoning, Technical Community, Western European and Others Group (WEOG)
Speaker 2: Mukom Akong Tamon, Technical Community, African Group
Speaker 3: Antonio Marcos Moreiras, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Tiago Jun Nakamura Nakamura, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Eduardo Barasal Morales, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Andrea Erina Komo, Technical Community, Latin American and Caribbean Group (GRULAC)
Tutorial - Auditorium - 30 Min
This tutorial has the objective of answering the following policy questions: 1) What is an IP? What is its importance to the Internet? 2) What is the difference between IPv4 and IPv6? Why does the Internet need to migrate from IPv4 to IPv6? 3) Why is IP relevant to digital inclusion? How can IP migration affect digital inclusion? 4) How does IP affect the common Internet user? 5) What are the roles of each stakeholder to help with this migration? 6) What are the impacts if IPv6 is not deployed on the Internet?
GOAL 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
GOAL 9: Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure
GOAL 10: Reduced Inequalities
Description: The session is structured in three segments. The first segment will be a presentation of an introduction on the general topic made by the moderator (3 minutes). A 21-minute segment will follow in which the topic will be explained in more detail by each speaker. Lastly, a 6 minute open mic session will be held to enforce the discussion with the audience about the topic Agenda: 3 min - Introduction to the theme made by the moderator. 21 min - explanation about the issue and the importance of the IPv6 awareness to digital inclusion following the scheme: .What is IP? .What is IPv4 .What is IPv6 .What's the problem? .Why is IPv6 relevant to digital inclusion? .How does IP affect the common Internet user? .What can you do about this? .What are we doing about this .RIR - Regional Internet Registry .Digital Literacy about IP .IPv6 training courses .Online courses 6 min - open mic for questions
Expected Outcomes: The expected outcome of this tutorial is to disseminate knowledge about IPv4 and IPv6 and how this migration affect the Internet users. Another expected outcome is to raise awareness about the importance of how critical IPv6 is to digital inclusion and what can be done to increase its adoption.
The discussion will be facilitated by the on site moderator who will guide the tutorial during the workshop as well as during the Q&A and comments session in the end. The online moderator will make sure the remote participants are represented in the debate. Online participation and interaction will rely on the WebEx platform. Those joining the session using WebEx (either invited members of the round-table or the general audience) will be granted the floor in the open debate segment of the workshop. People in charge of the moderation will strive to entertain onsite and remote participation indiscriminately. Social media (Facebook, but not Twitter or Reddit, since they do not support IPv6) will also be employed by the online moderators who will be in charge of browsing social media using hashtag (to be defined). Lastly, having two moderators will facilitate the control of time, which will be very important for the proper functioning of the workshop.
Relevance to Theme: Currently, the amount of free IPv4 public addresses that can be allocated to machines are depleting. According to some studies made by Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), it is expected that in less than 5 years there will be no more IPv4 public addresses to be assigned. Some measurements made by relevant Internet companies such as Google, Akamai and Cisco, indicates that only more than a quarter of the Internet traffic is running on IPv6. For more than 30 years the Internet has used IPv4 and now it is time to IPv4 be replaced by its successor IPv6. Then, the IPv6 deployment is a relevant issue to a successful digital inclusion, mainly in the developing countries and the Global South. Additionally, some studies claim that almost half of the global population has Internet access. This means that the other half of the world is still waiting to be included in this Internet ecosystem. This is worrisome as Internet access should be a catalyst for the enjoyment of human rights, most notably, the right to freedom of expression, according to the United Nations (UN). However is it really possible to guarantee Internet access to everyone with today's infrastructure? The goal of this tutorial is to raise awareness of Internet users to the importance of IPv6 for successful digital inclusion. We will focus on a technical issue that we are facing right now which jeopardizes the digital inclusion of half of the world. If we do not raise awareness to this topic now, we might face serious problems regarding their digital inclusion in the near future.
Relevance to Internet Governance: According to the UN, the Internet is a catalyst for the enjoyment of human rights, most notably, the right to freedom of expression. This means that digital inclusion should focus on guaranteeing Internet access to those who do not have it yet, especially in developing countries. Governments play a fundamental role in encouraging businesses to include a social dimension to their activities. In some regions far from the developed centers it is difficult to an Internet service provider to build Internet infrastructure. It is too expensive and usually it is only possible with the help of the government. Private sector is the core of the Internet, as the majority of Autonomous System that composes the Internet are from this stakeholder group. Also, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have an essential role because they are responsible for providing Internet connection in people's homes. Civil society has perhaps the most important role, as digital inclusion refers directly to people. This stakeholder group defends human rights and how to empower people through the use of the Internet. One of the ways of doing that is the development of community networks, which can provide Internet access in distant areas. These networks are being implemented with the help of the technical community, which are involved in promoting training courses to empower people with knowledge.
Online participation and interaction will rely on the WebEx platform. Those joining the session using WebEx (either invited members of the round-table or the general audience) will be granted the floor in the open debate segment of the workshop. People in charge of the moderation will strive to entertain onsite and remote participation indiscriminately.
Proposed Additional Tools: Social media (Facebook, but not Twitter or Reddit, since they do not support IPv6) will also be employed by the online moderators who will be in charge of browsing social media using hashtag (to be defined).
The main policy questions are: 1) Why is IPv6 deployment relevant to digital inclusion? 2) How can IPv6 migration affect digital inclusion? 3) What are the impacts if IPv6 is not deployed on the Internet? Our goal is to compare and contrast different points of view regarding digital inclusion in IPv6 deployment in three distinct regions (Europe, Africa and Latin America).
The panelists all agreed that IPv6 is an important tool to digital inclusion, putting in evidence questions like scarcity - and the near exhaustion - of addresses, the damage on latency by CGNAT and the broke of the end-to-end connectivity. Other important point raised by the table was the increase of the costs on maintaining side infrastructure to keep IPv4 infrastructure, like the higher prices of addresses in side markets or CGNAT servers. The last point was contested by one of the spectator, who told that if this is true, the market was already moving completely for IPv6.
Another important point of the discussion was the reasons to the low rates on IPv6 usage in AFRINIC region, that - as said by Mr. Tamon - is because of the socioeconomic context of the region. Prioritization of other activities and recycle of old networking devices or long term usage of end-user devices makes it harder.
Some of the actionable policy recommendations that we could make are as follows:
1 - [technical]: Train the technical community to deploy IPv6, such as ISPs, governments and content providers.
2 - Raise awareness of managers of different stakeholders to the importance of IPv6 deployment.
3 - Continue the discussion after the workshop. Schedule a follow-up session within a year to analyse the future status of IPv6 deployment.
4 - Create a working group for further discussion.
There are some initiatives that can be observed in Brazil, Africa and Europe.
In Brazil, NIC.br has been taking many steps towards enabling IPv6 deployment. For example, it has been providing IPv6 training courses to the technical community for over 10 years. NIC.br has also been promoting events and forums for further discussing IPv6 issues and succesful cases of IPv6 deployment.
There are also IPv6 training courses being offered both in Africa (by AFRINIC) and Europe (by RIPE NCC). In Africa, IPv6 consultancy is offered by AFRINIC to help companies and governments to deploy IPv6 in their networks. In Europe, RIPE NCC offers both presential and online IPv6 training courses for the technical community. Particularly in Germany, the German Government is working on deploying IPv6 on all its applications and infrastructure of the network at all levels of the public power.
One issue that keeps arising when you talk about IPv6 deployment, is reluctance. Indeed, it is still hard to convince the technical community and companies of the urgency of transitioning to IPv6. The arguments for the transition and its different approaches are still unclear to them, so the most important next step is to find different ways of raising the awareness of those communities (technical and private sector) to the urgency of this transition.
48 people (20 women) onsite
5 people online
This issue was not discussed.